Obama Vows Aggressive Agenda

Follow complete coverage of the presidential inauguration as President Obama is publicly sworn-in to begin his second term. Go to the live stream.

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama began his second term Monday by setting an agenda for the next four years built on bedrock Democratic social policies, in a provocative speech coming at a time of deep partisanship in the capital and lingering economic uncertainty across the country.

ENLARGE

President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama wave after emerging from the presidential limousine during the inaugural parade Monday.
Reuters

With specifics not usually offered in inaugural addresses, Mr. Obama promised to preserve government health-care programs, expand rights for women and gay couples, and press for gun controls, overhauls of the tax code and immigration laws, as well as climate-change measures.

His priorities sent a message to Washington's leaders that he is looking beyond the fiscal battles set to dominate the coming weeks, while signaling to the nation that he sees a large part of his legacy to be advocacy for underprivileged Americans.

"For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it," Mr. Obama said in a 15-minute speech that drew repeatedly on the opening phrase of the Constitution.

Mr. Obama laid out a governing agenda rooted in Democratic policy goals and equal rights, citing Seneca Falls, N.Y., Selma, Ala., and New York City's Stonewall Inn, birthplaces of the movements for women's equality, civil rights and gay liberation, respectively. "That is our generation's task—to make these words, these rights, these values of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness real for every American," the president said.

Inauguration 2013

President Obama took the oath of office Monday. Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Comparing 2009 and 2013

The president being sworn in Monday at the Capitol was the same man as in 2009, but not everything else was the same. Take a look at what's changed.

People, Politics and Culture of America

Mr. Obama took the ceremonial oath of office shortly before noon in front of hundreds of thousands of Americans stretching across the National Mall. In the speech that followed, he sought to reassure Democrats that he wouldn't compromise on their core principles and to warn Republicans he planned to pursue policies that place the two parties squarely at odds.

His second inaugural address did little to puncture the toxic air in Washington, essentially doing away with the signature goal of bridging the capital's political divide that he set when he was sworn in four years ago. Republicans widely viewed the speech as confrontational. Rather than a new beginning, they saw it as the capstone of two years of divided government in which the two parties have struggled to reach policy agreements.

"I am hoping that the president will recognize that compromise should have been the words for today, and they clearly weren't," said Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.). "We were hoping that he would use this day to reach out to all Americans and to all parties. He clearly did not."

Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) said the address was a nod to Mr. Obama's liberal supporters but ignored "the people on the Hill he needs to work with to get things done."

President Obama spoke about his strategy to eliminate the deficit and increase revenue, but what does that mean for expatriates? International tax consultant Laurence Lipsher provides tips for taxpayers abroad.

The president never mentioned Republicans specifically, but his criticisms were clear. He laced his speech with themes from his presidential campaign, including a reference to the country's prosperity resting "upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class."

He also vigorously defended social safety-net programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. GOP leaders have proposed cutting the programs in recent budget negotiations, and some Democrats have worried that Mr. Obama would agree, given that he has said he is open to such changes as part of a broad deficit-reduction deal that includes tax increases.

"These things do not sap our initiative,'' Mr. Obama said of the three programs. "They strengthen us. They do not make us a nation of takers; they free us to take the risks that make this country great."

Mr. Obama had taken the official oath of office Sunday in a quiet ceremony with family at the White House, in accord with the Jan. 20 date set in the Constitution for the start of presidential terms. That date fell on a Sunday this year, so Mr. Obama's public inauguration was moved to Monday, a day that coincided with the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.

With his hand on Bibles used by Dr. King and President Abraham Lincoln, Mr. Obama was sworn in by Chief Justice John Roberts at about 11:50 a.m. on the Capitol steps. His wife, Michelle Obama, and their two daughters stood at his side, as congressional leaders, cabinet secretaries and former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter sat nearby.

Vice President Joe Biden, who was officially sworn in Sunday by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, also took a ceremonial oath Monday.

An inauguration official said one million people attended the ceremony but declined to say how organizers arrived at that number. Law-enforcement officials didn't release crowd estimates, but the region's subway authority said 675,000 people had used the system, about 70% of the number for the 2009 inauguration. Many used other forms of transportation to reach the events.

Mr. Obama's speech came at a time of continued economic struggle—at 7.8%, the U.S. unemployment rate is the same as in January 2009, after peaking at 10% during the president's first term. Surveys show Americans feel less hopeful about the future under his leadership than when he first entered the White House.

Mr. Obama, who took office facing two wars, made scant mention of foreign policy, a contrast from his first inaugural address, which was largely a repudiation of former-President George W. Bush's handling of foreign affairs.

Instead, Mr. Obama on Monday promoted a list of domestic goals favored by liberals, including equal pay for women, expanded voting rights and a shift to sustainable energy sources. He also became the first president to explicitly promote gay rights during an inaugural address.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican who has been a sharp White House critic, congratulated Mr. Obama but made clear the two parties have different agendas.

"The president's second term represents a fresh start when it comes to dealing with the great challenges of our day; particularly, the transcendent challenge of unsustainable federal spending and debt," Mr. McConnell said in a statement. "Republicans are eager to work with the president on achieving this common goal, and we firmly believe that divided government provides the perfect opportunity to do so."

Mr. Obama's second inauguration was lower key than his first, but he appeared affected by the ceremony. As he left the podium to walk back into the Capitol, he turned to look out at the cheering crowd, remarking that he wanted to take in the scene once more because he wouldn't get to see it again.

After his speech, Mr. Obama took the first action of his second term, signing papers to nominate his choices to head of the State Department, Pentagon, Treasury and Central Intelligence Agency.

Mr. Obama began Inauguration Day with his family at St. John's Episcopal Church across from the White House. He then hosted congressional leaders for coffee before traveling to the Capitol.

Later, Mr. Obama joined members of Congress and other dignitaries for a lunch before participating in the traditional inaugural parade from the Capitol to the White House. Mr. Obama and the first lady stepped out of the presidential limousine to walk along a stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue, drawing cheers from the crowd. Supporters chanted "Obama" and "Four more years!"

In the evening, Mr. and Mrs. Obama were to attend two balls. At the Commander-in-Chief Ball, for military service members, they danced their first dance to "Let's Stay Together," performed by Jennifer Hudson.

apparently since we have lived with documented unemployment of 7.9 % and a more realistic figure in the double digits given the numbers of Americans who are no longer looking - not a political opportunity

so who is surprised that after 540 plus people were murdered in Chicago last year Mrs. Obama is now coming to Chicago - many of the 540 plus were high school students shot going to and from school

I for one am happy regarding all the pro obama posters clearly speaking up. It made me wake up and stop waffling on my role as an independent and finally acknowledge I should give to the repubs, last night I looked up this whole thing on how libs hate koch industries. It was an eye opener as to the true direction they want the country to go in, mainly their distrust of any openly christian citizens. Yep, openly christian is the new openly gay.

Good news out of Minnesota - long awaited property tax reform! Hopefully, the Minnesota model will be emulated in all states:

Minn. governor renews call for tax hike on wealthy - In Minn. budget blueprint, governor renews call for income tax hike on state's wealthiest, Associated Press – Jan. 15, 2013ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) -- Gov. Mark Dayton is calling for an income tax increase on Minnesota's wealthiest citizens. Dayton's budget proposal Tuesday carries out what's been one a signature goal of his governorship. He would create a new 4th tier income tax bracket of 9.85 percent, which would apply to taxable income over $250,000 for married joint filers and single filers who earn above $150,000. Dayton stresses the new rate would apply to only 2 percent of Minnesota taxpayers. His administration says it would raise $1.1 billion in the next budget cycle. The proposed income tax hike on high earners is part of a broader tax overhaul that would lower the state's sales tax rate but apply it to more things, and provide a rebate to property taxpayers in 2014.

Possibly one of the most descent Americans, a man I voted for in two elections, I believe President Obama now embarks on a losing position for four years.

At a time when Americans are suffering financially, where terrorism seems to have the upper hand, where debt is so crippling, where political disagreement abounds, President Obama is telling almost 50% of all Americans, "do it my way or else...and do it with me together."

It is not just or possible to insist that opponents agree with you or else. These fiery speeches do not bring Americans together but separate them more.

It is fairly clear that those who disagree with President Obama, also don't like him. And so, President Obama has not received a lot of cooperation or goodwill.

But still, a President cannot get anything done when that President pushes his opponent's faces into the dirt.

Also, I just did not hear in his speech much about the economy, or issues that affect all Americans. Instead, it seemed that President Obama was heavy on morality or social issues, and light on crucial economic issues facing ALL Americans. By ALL, I mean the 99%.

I can't help but wonder whether President Obama was trying to write history as the President of social and morality changes but surely, he must know with certainty, that few, if any, of his issues will get resolved in his second term.

It almost feels like President Obama knows he'll receive no cooperation from his opponents, and therefore, he's decided to put out there issues or goals that have no chance of enactment - solely for the purposes of being remembered in history as the President who tried.

Americans are facing a very complex life ahead these next four years. America is facing uncertain times. The World is fighting for economic air to breath and President Obama should be focused on common and universal issues, real compromise solutions, and progress for America and for ALL Americans.

As human beings, we cannot ask someone to do what we want to do...Together. We cannot ask others to do what they can't or won't do...Together. That's an oxymoron.

President Obama, I pray for your welfare and retention of great decency but please, please join with those who disagree with you and reach positive, forward movement, even if that means you do not enter the hallowed ground of the great Presidents that came before you. Please consider being remembered as a good President and solve issues facing ALL Americans with your opponents...Together..

Today the President declared war on 49% of Americans. The 49% of us who disagree with his policies and his trampling of the rule of law. His rhetoric is meant to co-opt the language of the Constitution and apply this language to his clearly socialist agenda. The Republican controlled House must respond to this challenge.They must use every weapon in their arsenal to engage their opponent by de-funding Obama care and reining in spending. They too won the election.The War is on.PS: President Barry did get to use his middle name, "Hussein", today for the first time in four years. His allies in the middle east and around the world, who have targeted American Citizens, are celebrating along with him. American Hostages in Algeria have been killed. The bodies of our Ambassador and the Navy Seals, who gave their lives to protect him, were paraded through the streets of Benghazi. Shame on this administration for dancing on their graves.

The title of this piece, emblazoned in larger-than-usual type across the WSJ homepage sums up the essence of what Obama wants and stands for very well. And yet, it is the one thing that is so frequently looked over as merely a bromide. The President holds as the standard: the "vulnerable". That is the wrong standard. What he *should* be holding as the standard is the individual and his right to his life and property - regardless of his position in life, i.e poor and "vulnerable" or rich and successful.

Can't force balance and equal results. Moochers remain moochers even after all the giveaways. Results don't change much even after the affirmative actions, the ambitious and hard working always come up ahead. It is only natural.

Mr Jones ... I call them as I see them and you are a free loader on here too. That said .... is it humanly possible to engage a progressive without being called (1) stupid (2) sleeze ball (3) sheep (4) neurotic (5) reference race (6) paranoid (7) racist. And that's just from you. I bet you just shine in your chosen profession.

A Gaping Divide: Straddling Capitalism’s Fault Line by G. Ballafante, 2/21/2008:Jamie Johnson, an heir to the pharmaceutical fortune that bears his family’s name, has made a career out of retailing his wealth guilt, and so far the results have been anything but shameful. In “Born Rich,” shown on HBO in 2003, young people living on ancestral largess spoke — insightfully, candidly, obnoxiously — about the joys and agonies of their circumstances. The film garnered Mr. Johnson two Emmy nominations, and he deserved them. It also won him a chance to try his hand again, this time with “The One Percent,” another documentary, which arrives with the goal of examining the great, gaping disparity in wealth that severs the American soul. Mr. Johnson triumphs when he titillates. Although he sits down to speak seriously about economic inequity with the likes of Ralph Nader and the former labor secretary Robert B. Reich, he reaches the heights of his reportorial talent extracting offensive expressions of cluelessness and self-satisfaction from the moneyed and powerful. Here is the Kinko’s founder Paul Orfalea on why he wouldn’t mind getting even richer: “Well, one day I’d like to go to the Moon and look at the planet Earth and say, ‘Wow, there’s part of my portfolio.’ ” The Michael Moore fantasy just keeps going. Here is Mr. Orfalea talking about his random acts of charity: “I don’t usually give homeless folks money. Unless a homeless person is playing music or trying to better themselves, selling pencils or doing something, I generally don’t do much.” There is a chance that these comments have been taken out of context. For all we know Mr. Orfalea may be financing six orphanages in Rwanda right now, but whatever the truth of his philanthropy, his remarks give substance to the prejudice that the extraordinarily well off behave obliviously and as if immune to judgment.That rich people get in trouble by talking too much was made evident in Mr. Johnson’s previous film. In a particularly surprising moment we learn that Nicole Buffett, a granddaughter of Warren E. Buffett who works as a household organizer for a wealthy family in San Francisco, has been excommunicated by her grandfather simply for participating in Mr. Johnson’s current project. She holds a letter from him explaining that he no longer considers her part of the family.Mr. Johnson’s film suffers from his insistence on trying to get his father, James Loring Johnson, to talk about his wealth. He has no interest, and Jamie Johnson’s badgering winds up seeming like the pestilence borne of entitlement. When the family’s asset manager, Brian McNally, gets him to back off by calling him “an arrogant trustifarian,” you’re just not sad.Such immaturity turns up elsewhere, primarily when it seems that Mr. Johnson thinks he is telling us something we don’t already know. The film’s implicit presumption is that the viewer has very little idea that a tiny percentage of the American population — the 1 percent — controls the majority of the wealth, and that poor people suffer because of it. The cuts between images of lives high and low (he goes to private clubs and Palm Beach; he interviews people in the projects on the South Side of Chicago and flashes scenes of a post-Katrina New Orleans) are so abrupt and jarring that the film almost seems to be saying: “Like, Omigod! There are all these people who play croquet, and then there are, like, these guys who don’t have anything and are forced to drive cabs.” But “The One Percent” compels despite its many simplicities, showing, for instance, how sugar titans in this country have bought enough political influence to reap millions and millions in government subsidies as they trample the Everglades and exploit workers. Mr. Johnson is a young heir who isn’t out trying to name a fragrance after himself. And he cares, even if naïvely, about something that truly matters.

I think all American banks were laundering money. And were supposed to to bankrupt the US. And make everyone else wealthy off of it. Notice I did not say rich. I said wealthy. Buying summer homes with your money, ect...

The Vulnerable by O is unions,welfare and food stamp recipients,Blacks and Hispanics(for their votes) ,illegals,gays and Muslims. Where has the Americans that worked hard to build this country gone and are silent if there are any left. After 4 more years of O, this country will not be the one that we all enjoyed living in in the past. Alas! the great down fall of once the greatest nation on earth was done by nothing more then a one black man not Iran, North Korea, Taliban nor Al Qaeda. Such a sad sight to watch those millions of people standing in line to takes some government hand outs for free without working. It will only last so long and soon or a later it will dry up. Once the interest rates start going up the stock market will be crashing and we will go right back into recession but this time it will be worse then the 1930 great depression.

It sounds like a good income for every 20 billion of the people's money spent you make 25 billion turning it into bank notes with the AIG. American Investers Group. What if that was the investers money. Investing in sub companies of only20 Industries. OUCH!! TO THE INVESTERS

"We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate," he said. "We must act, knowing that our work will be imperfect."

The chutzpah of this guy is amazing. Not only did he not follow one word of his own advice the last 4 years, he's STILL not today. This should read: "You must not take positions that contradict my own beliefs, name calling is reserved to me alone, and we must do what I say, even if the result is slapdash and prone to failure."

How the GOP Became the Party of the Rich by T. Dickinson: The nation is still recovering from a crushing recession that sent UE hovering above 9% for two straight years. The president, mindful of soaring deficits, is pushing bold action to shore up the nation's balance sheet. Cloaking himself in the language of class warfare, he calls on a hostile Congress to end wasteful tax breaks for the rich. "We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share," he thunders to a crowd in Georgia. Such tax loopholes, he adds, "made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10% of his salary – and that's crazy." Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver," he demands, "or less?" The crowd, sounding every bit like the protesters from Occupy Wall Street, roars back: "MORE!" The year was 1985 and the president was Reagan.Today's Republican Party may revere Reagan as the patron saint of low taxation. But the party of Reagan – which understood that higher taxes on the rich are sometimes required to cure ruinous deficits – is dead and gone. Instead, the modern GOP has undergone a radical transformation, reorganizing itself around a grotesque proposition: that the wealthy should grow wealthier still, whatever the consequences for the rest of us. Modern-day Republicans have become, quite simply, the Party of the Party of the Rich."The Republican Party has totally abdicated its job in our democracy, which is to act as the guardian of fiscal discipline and responsibility," says D. Stockman, budget director under Reagan. "They're on an anti-tax jihad that benefits the prosperous classes."Since Republicans rededicated themselves to slashing taxes for the wealthy in 1997, the average annual income of the 400 richest Americans has more than tripled, to $345 million – while their share of the tax burden has plunged by 40 percent. Today, a billionaire in the top 400 pays less than 17% of his income in taxes – five percentage points less than a bus driver earning $26,000 a year. "Most Americans got none of the growth of the preceding dozen years," says J. Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist. "All the gains went to the top percentage points."The GOP campaign to aid the wealthy has left America unable to raise the money needed to pay its bills. "The Republican Party went on a tax-cutting rampage and spending spree," says Rhode Island governor and former GOP senator L. Chafee, pointing to two deficit-financed wars and an unpaid-for prescription-drug entitlement. "It tanked the economy." Tax receipts as a percent of the total economy have fallen to levels not seen since before the Korean War – nearly 20% below the historical average.Republicans talk about job creation, about preserving family farms and defending small businesses, and reforming Medicare and SS. But almost without exception, every proposal put forth by GOP lawmakers and presidential candidates is intended to preserve or expand tax privileges for the wealthiest Americans. And most of their plans, which are presented as common-sense measures that will aid all Americans, would actually result in higher taxes for middle-class taxpayers and the poor. With 14 million Americans out of work, and with one in seven families turning to food stamps simply to feed their children, Republicans have responded to the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression by slashing inheritance taxes, extending the Bush tax cuts for millionaires/billionaires, and endorsing a tax amnesty for big corporations that have hidden billions in profits in offshore tax havens. They also wrecked the nation's credit rating by rejecting a debt-ceiling deal that would have slashed future deficits by $4 trillion – simply because 1/4 of the money would have come from closing tax loopholes on the rich.

Early in his first term, Republicans made it their number one priority to make President Obama a one-term President, despite the deep economic, fiscal and foreign policy challenges facing the country after 8 years of their poor stewardship.

Despite Republican obstructionism, he rose to the challenges of his office and artfully averted an economic depression, ended intractable military engagements, decapitated al-Qaeda leadership, passed health reform and sought equity for women in the work place, marriage equality and immigration reform.

He has done much to repair the country's standing around the world. Corporate profits are at record levels. The stock market is up over 80%. The country is safe. The unemployment rate has steadily fallen since peaking at 10%.

His harshest critics give him no credit and refuse to support anything he advocates.

But the vast majority of the country interested in tackling our problems and moving our country forward will stand with the President to embrace more prudent fiscal policy, sensible gun control, immigration reform, policies to address climate change and marriage equality.

For all his critics in the din, history will remember President Obama very well.

Just another Blue state doing its best to send the most productive citizens out of the state. 9.85% + 39.6 + 3.8 on all income over $250k is only cheered by the taker class, the Chris Veils of the world looking for gov't to exact the "revenge" Obama talked about during the campaign.

It's all rhetoric. Behind every glossy Obama line rests the real purpose of the exercise. Here, Obama is setting us up for more redistribution and more guarantees of equality of results. He wants us to know that he plans to "fix" the game and that the "contributors" need to be prepared to fund it.

So Obama should start confiscating "global wealth?" Are you kidding? Who is going to collect it? Obama's Brownshirts? Domestically, are you suggesting a wealth tax? If so, the Communist Revolution could be well on its way to completion, not to mention the flight of wealth out of this country, along with a concomitant destruction of what is remaining of our market economy.

Obama's "bold actions" to tackle the deficit amounts to more soaking of the rich. Unfortunately for Obama, there just isn't enough money there to pay for the increasing entitlement costs that he is encouraging. Obama is leading a fiscal disaster of the Detroit type. Hopefully, this country can survive another four years of this ideological incompetent before it totally crumbles from the weight of his horrendous management.

To Gary Myers:If austerity taxation is necessary and you have to choose between those with surplus financial resources (Plan B) and those struggling to make ends meet (Plan A), which is the logical choice? This past Christmas, retail sales were so extremely anemic because the masses are insolvent. The few with the $21 to $32 trillion stashed offshore should have had sense enough to go on extreme shopping sprees over the holidays to make up for the slack caused by the insolvency of the masses. They did NOT, so now Plan B was necessary.

Dead like my dad. My father invested $29,000 for 31 years every month. They killed him and I want to see the result of my father's money. He was a soldier in WWII and then an Engineer for Belll South Communications and that is the only way to get their stock, working for them. Then he worked as an Engineer for Rockwell International only way to get stock from them too. So I know what I'm talking about. The president is not just a president. He has to be more than the White House before he can be in the running to make the House stronger. That's why my dad with all his investments and inventions for this country could not run. But before they killed him he wanted to run. And he knew how to run this whole country free. He was working on solar energy to give it to the USPeople free. They found housemeters in his basement because he was working on giving electric and heat and clean water free on one meter. And after you pay off the meter the sun gives you your energy free. And neighborhood farms for people to get food free for a little labor from those who are able. The people eat free. And had a free shelter I would like to reopen. I was working on curing people free from the ground. Natural Cures with no side affects and you will get rid of diseases. But that is how they make big money off your diseases. So they killed my family but I lived so they sent someone to kill me. He has been trying for 34 years. But my dad taught me well about everything. I was not taught in the US schools. I was home taught all about the world and traveled all over the world learning and seeing for myself. I met real American Indians when I was a child. And started learning about the World then.

What the other side does is irrelevant. He is the one who created the standard he was supposed to hold himself to. He never really attempted to follow it. He doesn't get respect because he doesn't show respect. Even if the other side withheld all insults, it would only embolden him to be more abrasive and pursue his real goal: elimination of opposition. He thinks more like CBS' Political Director:

To Mike Nelson:You call $21 to $32 trillion "not enough money?"A global super-rich elite had at least $21 trillion (£13tn) hidden in secret tax havens by the end of 2010, according to a major study. The figure is equivalent to the size of the US and Japanese economies combined. The Price of Offshore Revisited was written by J. Henry, a former chief economist at the consultancy McKinsey, for the Tax Justice Network. Mr. Henry said his $21tn is actually a conservative figure and the true scale could be $32tn. A trillion is 1,000 billion. His study deals only with financial wealth deposited in bank and investment accounts, and not other assets such as property and yachts. Mr. Henry estimates that since the 1970s, the richest citizens of these 139 countries had amassed $7.3tn to $9.3tn of "unrecorded offshore wealth" by 2010. Other findings in Mr. Henry's report include: 1) At the end of 2010, the 50 leading private banks alone collectively managed more than $12.1tn in cross-border invested assets for private clients; 2) The three private banks handling the most assets offshore are UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs; 3) Less than 100,000 people worldwide own about $9.8tn of the wealth held offshore. Source: Tax Havens: Super-Rich Hiding at Least $21 Trillion , July 22, 2012.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.